Speaking as WG member: 

> On Sep 2, 2024, at 17:42, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Chris -
> 
> I am continuing to think on this - based both on Bruno's input and now your 
> input.
> 
> However, this would seem to potentially put the WG in the role of being asked 
> to pass judgment on whether a given implementation's configuration options 
> are conformant or not.
> This is not a role I want to play - nor is it a responsibility I think the WG 
> should take on.

I feel this should be added to the “Management Considerations” though it should 
not be a “MUST”. Now should it be a “SHOULD” or a “MAY”?  I don’t have a strong 
opinion although I lean toward “MAY” since we’ve gotten along fine without it 
for so long and it doesn’t make sense to try mandate additional functionality.  


Thanks,
Acee



> 
> I would be interested in your thoughts in this regard (with or without your 
> WG chair hat on).
> 
> Thanx.
> 
>   Les
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Christian Hopps <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Monday, September 2, 2024 9:06 AM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Cc: Christian Hopps <[email protected]>; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
>> <[email protected]>; Yingzhen Qu <[email protected]>; lsr
>> <[email protected]>; lsr-chairs <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [Lsr] WG Last Call for draft-ietf-lsr-multi-tlv (7/1/2024 -
>> 7/15/2024)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 2, 2024, at 11:38, [email protected] wrote:
>>> 
>>> It is not within the purview of an RFC to mandate that an implementation
>> have a particular knob.
>>> [Bruno]
>>>    • According to which document /rule?
>> 
>> [as wg-member]
>> 
>> Regardless of whether we choose to add this requirement, I'm pretty sure it's
>> fine to mandate that something be configurable (e.g., disable/enable) in an
>> RFC. I haven't done a search but I definitely have seen this in other
>> documents.
>> 
>> What this would be saying is that in order to claim support for RFCXXXX one
>> must have the given configuration option.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Chris.
>> [as wg-member]

_______________________________________________
Lsr mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to